Gregorio Aglipay v.

Juan Ruiz

FACTS:
Respondent Juan Ruiz, Director of Posts, announced in the dailies of Manila that he would
order the issues of postage stamps commemorating the celebration in the City of Manila of the
Thirty-third International Eucharistic Congress, organized by the Roman Catholic Church.
Petitioner Mons. Gregorio Aglipay, Supreme Head of the Philippine Independent Church, seeks
the issuance from this court of a writ of prohibition to prevent the respondent from issuing and
selling postage stamps commemorative of the Thirty-third International Eucharistic Congress.
The respondent, despite the protest, publicly announced having sent to the United States the
designs of the postage stamps for printing.
But the further sale of the stamps is sought to be prevented by the petitioner, alleging that the
action of the respondent is violative of the provisions of section 23, subsection 3, Article VI, of
the Constitution of the Philippines, which provides as follows:

No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, or used, directly or indirectly, for
the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, secretarian, institution, or system
of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious
teacher or dignitary as such, except when such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned
to the armed forces or to any penal institution, orphanage, or leprosarium.

The prohibition herein expressed is a direct corollary of the principle of separation of church and
state.

ISSUE:
WON the issuance of stamps commemorating the Eucharistic celebration organized by the
Roman Catholic Church is violative of the principle of separation of church and state.

HELD:
No, the issuance of the stamps is not violative of the principle of separation of church and state.
Without the necessity of adverting to the historical background of this principle, it is sufficient to
say that the union of church and state is prejudicial to both, for occasions might arise when the
state will use the church, and the church the state, as a weapon in the furtherance of their
respective ends and aims. In this country, we enjoy both religious and civil freedom. All the
officers of the Government, from the highest to the lowest, in taking their oath to support and
defend the constitution, bind themselves to recognize and respect the constitutional guarantee
of religious freedom, with its inherent limitations and recognized implications. It should be stated
that what is guaranteed by our Constitution is religious liberty, not mere religious toleration.
Religious freedom, however, as a constitutional mandate is not inhibition of profound reverence
for religion and is not denial of its influence in human affairs. Religion as a profession of faith to
an active power that binds and elevates man to his Creator is recognized. And, in so far as it
instills into the minds the purest principles of morality, its influence is deeply felt and highly
appreciated.
When the Filipino people, in the preamble of their Constitution, implored "the aid of Divine
Providence, in order to establish a government that shall embody their ideals, conserve and
develop the patrimony of the nation, promote the general welfare, and secure to themselves and
their posterity the blessings of independence under a regime of justice, liberty and democracy,"
they thereby manifested reliance upon Him who guides the destinies of men and nations. The
elevating influence of religion in human society is recognized here as elsewhere.

In the case at bar, it appears that the respondent Director of Posts issued the postage stamps in
question under the provisions of Act No. 4052 of the Philippine Legislature.

No. 4052. — AN ACT APPROPRIATING THE SUM OF SIXTY THOUSAND PESOS AND
MAKING THE SAME AVAILABLE OUT OF ANY FUNDS IN THE INSULAR TREASURY NOT
OTHERWISE APPROPRIATED FOR THE COST OF PLATES AND PRINTING OF POSTAGE
STAMPS WITH NEW DESIGNS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

Act No. 4052 contemplates no religious purpose in view. What it gives the Director of Posts is
the discretionary power to determine when the issuance of special postage stamps would be
"advantageous to the Government." Of course, the phrase "advantageous to the Government"
does not authorize the violation of the Constitution. It does not authorize the appropriation, use
or application of public money or property for the use, benefit or support of a particular sect or
church.
There has been no constitutional infraction in the case at bar, Act No. 4052 grants the Director
of Posts, with the approval of the Secretary of Public Works and Communications, discretion to
issue postage stamps with new designs "as often as may be deemed advantageous to the
Government."